Lord Normanby was succeeded by Lord John Russell, 1840. The decrease of
transportation to Norfolk Island and Van Diemen's Land, was interpreted
as an intention to terminate the system altogether. This was avowed in
the usual organs of the government, and the colonists were warned[244]
to prepare for the change which awaited them. Thus the total number
arriving in Van Diemen's Land in 1839 and 1840, was little more than
2,000: less than one-fifth of the usual number transported.
Two thousand inhabitants of New South Wales made a last effort to
recover their share in the benefits of convictism. They forwarded a
petition to the British parliament, entreating the continuance of
transportation for five years longer. Lord John Russell regarded their
request as a strong argument against compliance; and a few weeks after
settled the question by cancelling the order in council! The intention
of Lord John Russell was to limit transportation to the worst class of
offenders, estimated at 500 per annum.
Sir William Molesworth endeavoured to prevent the restoration of the
practice, and proposed to supply the demand for labour by anticipating
the land fund. The decision of parliament was precipitated by the
contrivance of a friend of Captain Maconochie, Mr. Innes, who, in a
pamphlet of considerable acumen and literary merit, set forth the value
of his scheme. He asserted that the advantage of transportation as a
reformatory and deterring system, notwithstanding the numerous
experiments, remained yet to be resolved.[245] The House of Commons
negatived the motion of Molesworth (September, 1840), and the crowded
condition of the hulks excited serious complaints. The House of Commons
resolved that the sentence of transportation should be carried into
effect, and the prisoners sent out of the country. Lord John Russell
then observed that, although he admitted that it was desirable to send a
certain number of convicts abroad, where after their liberation they
might earn their own livelihood, "he was bound at the same time to
consider the state of society, and not expose it to the evils likely to
result from a disproportionate number of convicts." (April, 1841.) He
announced that not fewer than 2,000 would be sent to Norfolk Island and
Tasman's Peninsula.
During these debates, Captain John Montagu, the colonial secretary, was
in England. The views of this colony were favorable to transportation
under the plan of assignment: many, indeed, were anxious to obtain,
through the old channels, the supply of labour so necessary to their
prosperity. Montagu succeeded in removing some impressions at
Downing-street, unfavorable to the colonial masters, and was welcomed as
their successful advocate and general benefactor. At a public dinner,
given to celebrate his return, all parties united in expressions of warm
respect and gratulation. The roads, he observed, were to be made, public
works to be completed, and labour to be abundant. When in England, it
was said, "Mr. Montagu steadily pursued one object: transportation--no
matter under what modification." The system of assignment had already
terminated.
It had been determined that all new prisoners should be worked in gangs,
and on their dispersion should receive two classes of tickets; the last
giving them greater freedom. It had been recommended by the secretary of
state, to compel the prisoners in service, to wear a badge; but this
open mark of slavery was exceedingly offensive, and indeed, as a
measure of police, exceedingly impolitic--not only calculated to degrade
well-conducted men in their own eyes, but to facilitate recognition, and
secret signs; and perhaps the confederation of a large class, whose
numbers it was so desirable to disguise.
The probation system, initiated by Sir John Franklin in obedience to the
orders of Lord John Russell, was intended to combine the principles
afterwards extended by Lord Stanley with some of the advantages supposed
to result from assignment. The former practice, by which the government
transferred the prisoner without delay to the service of a master, left
his fate to accident.
Sir John Franklin endeavoured to meet, as far as possible, the views of
all parties. To carry out the plans of Lord J. Russell, he proceeded to
form gangs of from two to three hundred men, and to locate them wherever
it might be practicable to render them useful. The superintendence of
the scheme he committed to Captain Forster, who at the same moment held
the office of police magistrate, and whose administrative tact was
highly esteemed. The effects appeared, at first, encouraging, and the
despatches of Sir John Franklin gave promise of success; but in 1842 he
found it necessary to recall the favorable opinion: he found that many
great and formidable evils were rising into strength, and that the gangs
had far from realised his anticipations in the moral improvement of
convicts.[246]
It is probable that transportation would have been limited by Lord John
Russell, had not a change of ministry thrown the colonies into the hands
of Lord Stanley. This nobleman, who succeeded September, 1841, differed
greatly from his predecessors. He hinted that the colonies were not
entitled to separate consideration--scarcely to notice, in the
discussion of this question. That the interest of the mother country was
the final and sufficient object to regard; but he did not hold the
common views of assignment. He thought that it had been far too hastily
condemned. Thus it did not seem improbable that on his return to power
the former system, so highly prized by the colonists, would be restored.
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 244: _Courier_, February, 1840.]
[Footnote 245: The following eloquent and touching appeal closes this
very able production:--
"I am well aware of the scorn with which the main principle recognised
in these pages--the reform of the culprit, is regarded by many persons.
I know that the task is pronounced a hopeless, visionary one. But, that
a being _lives_, is a Divine authority for believing him not to be
beyond hopes, in which his own reclamation is implied. That the task is
not an easy one, is admitted; but that is the case in reference to every
other end of penal institutions as well: and, is it really so very much
more difficult to reclaim a criminal than any other man given to vice? I
believe not;--criminals, I think, will be found even more accessible to
religious influences, sympathisingly applied, than those whose errors
have had a less equivocal stamp. Their apparent hardness of heart is not
always the native hardness of the rock, but more often the frozen
hardness of the ice, which the sun of human sympathies may melt again.
The world, accustomed to judge them harshly, to see only their crime,
and to see it without its palliations--to out-cast them, makes them what
they become; when instead, a discreet humanity might have converted
many, after a first transgression, into useful and honored members of
society.
'The tainted branches of the tree,
If lopp'd with care, a strength may give,
By which the rest shall bloom and live
All greenly fresh and wildly free:
But if the _lightning_ in its wrath
The waving boughs with fury scathe,
The massy trunk the ruin feels,
And never more a leaf reveals.'"
--_Secondary Punishments. By Frederick Maitland Innes._ 1841.]
[Footnote 246: November, 1842.]